Look who's back in town

My friend and former About Town colleague Xavier Goldie returns with a blog about Botany.

Meanwhile, Cabinet Magazine discusses Mauve and The Southern Poverty Law Center looks at the ex-gay movement.

Not for lunchtime reading

A man in Idaho saw the Mark of the Beast on his hand. The story then gets worse and then worse still. You can read it here, if you must. Hat tip to Kelly at Rational Response Squad.

Home is where the heart is

Following our architectural theme, today's Standard comments on a post by Whaleoil which shows a photograph of the home of John Minto. Since architectural warfare has broken out in blogzealand, the Fundy Post can now show you an exclusive photograph of Whaleoil's own executive lifestyle home.



Readers will appreciate the clean lines and the way that form follows function.

Erratum It seems the photograph shown in this post is not of the home of Whaleoil but of a US Navy barracks in San Diego. The barracks were built in the 1960s but their distinctive plan became known to the world only after Google Earth captured an image of them.

Here's Lene Lovich:

Crush with Eyeliner

Oh dear. Mr Key was on Noelle's programme on the wireless this morning. She may as well have been talking to static. Apparently, policies will be rolled out at some time in the future. Sigh.

Meanwhile, my earlier post about Mr Key's bach has come to the attention of both Not PC and The Standard. And it turns out that sharks are circling. Welcome to the Summer of Metaphor.

Pic unrelated. Here's REM:

A Remembrance of Things Pastry

I learned today that the grievances felt by the Tuhoe people are related not to contemporary oppression but to events which occurred to their ancestors, more than a century and a half ago. I share their sense of injustice. Each time I dip a Madeleine into my tea, I am reminded that my Huguenot ancestors were oppressed by the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, by which Louis XIV removed the rights given them by Henri IV. Forced to flee France to the culinary wasteland which is England, the Huguenots never again would taste delicious cake.

Feeling oppressed as I do, my immediate response is to take a walk into town, where I might find a patisserie to loot. It is only by the redistribution of brioche that such grievances can be assuaged.

From the Scott-Moncrieff translation. The painting, A Huguenot on St Bartholemew's Day, is by Sir John Everett Millais.

I am typing on Internet

Oh hai. I just thought you should know that, right now, I am thinking "whatever happened to Twitter?" It seems only moments ago that people of my acquaintance (you know who you are) were telling the world what they were doing, as they were doing it, all day long. Then they stopped. Did they all of a sudden become self-conscious? It is not as if Twitter has gone away. It is still here. Perhaps people were put off by the rather dour testimonials, such as "When I first started doing it, I thought, 'geez, not another website to worry about updating and checking', but now I'm glad I did it" from one Point Chevalier (no relation). Whatever the reason, it seems to have become uncool, at least among the people whom I know. I am glad of it. In fact, Twitter is so uninteresting that I wish I had not started writing about it. I had better make up for this post with a cat picture.

Guns and ammunition

Richard Taylor commented on my post about terrorism; since the post was made a while ago and the comments might not be noticed and since I have nothing else to post today, I repeat it here:

If you wanted the issue of guns discussed why didn't you speak up?

There are in fact times when guns are necessary in the process of social and political change - Capitalism itself came about via many wars and revolutions - perhaps there are Tuhoe and others who are organising to use guns - perhaps not - but you have to show that such a use is ALWAYS a bad thing. Always bad to have guns?? Guns were sued to stop Hitler.

(I have in fact fired a gun - I don't like guns in general though BTW)

I agree that guns (for the most part) are bad news; but the people I saw with guns were the police - and they have had them and used them in NZ for years. Most of those protesting have a more sophisticated view than this kind of very superficial synopsis of yours; and most in general and in principal oppose guns as a primary weapon for use in a political change - but again - we heard nothing from you at the PR Bar...)

Why are the Maori - including Tuhoe so angry?

What you have said here is very witty perhaps but seems to float around and away from the subject -it is not even very clear what your point is...

That some people were planning to murder certain politicians or others - so what? maybe it will be necessary one day.

That guns are terrible? - Hmm - yes - they can be. But hands can "murder or create" (Eliot) - we don't need guns to kill...

That protest organistions attract mixed bunch(es)? - yes they do -

That Jamie Lockett's speech was quite tedious and almost meaningless? (Almost like that of an agent provocateur or an SIS agent? Or a "madman"?) Yes. It seemed so to me...but he was at least given, and took, the right to speak out, BUT

- YOU DIDNT SPEAK OUT AT THE PR BAR AGAINST GUNS OR AGAINST THE TUHOE or PUT YOUR CASE FOR THE RIGHTNESS OF THE POLICE ACTIONS AGAINST MAORI AND TUHOE ETC - why not?

Because to do so would have been rude. The event was not a debate but a fundraiser and I was there not as a participant but as an observer.

And if my point wasn't clear, let me make it so now: what Mr Iti and friends were doing was wrong. We do not live in Nazi Germany or some police state. We live in the world's oldest democracy, where we elect our governments, where we have the rule of law as well as plenty of checks and balances. No act of political violence is necessary or justified. As citizens we have the right to elect our representatives. We do not want Mr Iti and a bunch of suburban guerillas deciding that it may be necessary to murder some of them.

I am sorry if that is not a very sophisticated view. I think there has been quite enough sophistication already. I have heard so many excuses, justifications and downright evasions when it comes to this matter. It seems to be alright to plot to kill people, although nobody seems to be able to explain what is the cause that justifies murder. Is this killing allowed so that Mr Iti can set up his own fiefdom in the Ureweras? Or is it allowable by more general reasons, because Maori have had a bad time in the past? Or is it just because of the System? Or some other sophisticated reason, such as the contradictions inherent in Late Capitalism? Do let me know. I would hate to be thought of as superficial.

Before answering, you may wish to read the essay from the Boston Review about the Red Army Faction in Germany, to which I linked a few days ago - I don't do these links just for lulz, you know; there is a purpose. You see, that bunch of middle-class fucktards who comprised the RAF not only killed innocent people but they also damaged the cause of the Left in Germany.

Anyway, enough of this. Mr Taylor has an interesting art blog and that his daughters are members of the Nudie Suits, a popular beat combo for which I have more than a little affection. So in the interests of peace, love and understanding, here is some Western Swing:

This post made from recycled materials

According to Idiot/Savant, "Nominations are open for the 2008 Bloggies. It has an Australia/New Zealand category. You know what to do..."

Some posts

This is what we want: quality cat blogging. Russell writes about Colin, much to the displeasure of Idiot/Savant.

George is warming to Labour and has furries on bikes, a clean and green approach to a bizarre fetish provided by popular beat combo Bat For Lashes.

Lyndon makes predictions.

Jarrod goes shopping.

Deborah takes on the Pope

Kakariki discoversmud stencils

Zoster finds a Hello Kitty assault rifle

Terence delves into the memory hole.

Peter designs a better bach.

Catch 22 revisited

The undisputed master of milking the system is KBR, the former Halliburton subsidiary so ubiquitous in Iraq that soldiers even encounter its customer-survey sheets in outhouses. The company has been exposed by whistle-blowers in numerous Senate hearings for everything from double-charging taxpayers for $617,000 worth of sodas to overcharging the government 600 percent for fuel shipments. When things went wrong, KBR simply scrapped expensive gear: The company dumped 50,000 pounds of nails in the desert because they were too short, and left the Army no choice but to set fire to a supply truck that had a flat tire. "They did not have the proper wrench to change the tire," an Iraq vet named Richard Murphy told investigators, "so the decision was made to torch the truck."

In perhaps the ultimate example of military capitalism, KBR reportedly ran convoys of empty trucks back and forth across the insurgent-laden desert, pointlessly risking the lives of soldiers and drivers so the company could charge the taxpayer for its phantom deliveries. Truckers for KBR, knowing full well that the trips were bullshit, derisively referred to their cargo as "sailboat fuel."

From Rolling Stone, via Alternet, with hat tip to Terence.